← 返回

新时代的弥漫大 B 细胞淋巴瘤:绘制风险图谱的预后工具

英文原题:Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in the new era: prognostic tools for mapping risk.

查看英文原题

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in the new era: prognostic tools for mapping risk.

PubMed 2025/10/20(内容时间) Ann Hematol Q3 · IF 2.3(JCR 2025)

分数与星级只用于站内排序 —— 不代表疗效、安全性或个人适用性。

中文摘要

弥漫大B细胞淋巴瘤(DLBCL)在临床和生物学上均具有异质性。R-CHOP仍是一线标准治疗;polatuzumab-R-CHP可使特定亚组的无进展生存期获益,但早期复发和原发难治仍然存在。经典风险指数,尤其是IPI及其修订版本,仍具有基准价值,但只能部分反映不良生物学特征。本综述整合了已确立及新兴的评估工具:多变量临床评分(如NPI、GELTAMO)、老年人模型(GPI)、宿主状态指标(HALP、GNRI)、PET衍生的肿瘤负荷和播散指标(TMTV、TLG;IMPI)、免疫微环境特征,以及医疗系统指标(诊断至治疗间隔)。

我们总结遗传学预测指标(如CD79B/PIM1)以及通过循环肿瘤DNA(ctDNA)评估的动态分子应答(早期/主要分子应答),并评价中期PET的预后价值;在临床试验之外,中期PET不应直接指导治疗。对于复发/难治性疾病,二线年龄校正IPI和移植前PET可帮助判断是否适合自体移植;随机试验证实,在早期复发或原发难治情况下,CD19 CAR-T 优于挽救性化学免疫治疗。双特异性抗体和抗体药物偶联物则为CAR-T 治疗后患者或不适合移植者扩大了治疗选择。另一方面,中枢神经系统(CNS)风险评估最好采用结合病灶部位及基因型进行优化的CNS-IPI;鉴于预防治疗的疗效证据不一,应个体化实施。

总体而言,应开展基于风险且由生物学特征指导的治疗;所有患者的报告均应列出NCCN-IPI(并同时列出IPI),并在条件允许时纳入影像学肿瘤负荷、基因组学和ctDNA信息。

展开英文摘要原文

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is clinically and biologically heterogeneous. R-CHOP remains the frontline standard, with polatuzumab-R-CHP conferring a subgroup-dependent progression-free survival gain, yet early relapse and primary refractoriness persist. Classical risk indices, especially IPI and revised versions, retain benchmark value but only partially capture adverse biology.

This review integrates established and emerging tools: multivariable clinical scores (e. g. , NPI, GELTAMO), geriatric models (GPI), host-status metrics (HALP, GNRI), PET-derived tumor burden and dissemination (TMTV, TLG; IMPI), immune-microenvironment signatures, and health-system markers (diagnosis-to-treatment interval).

We summarize genetic predictors (e. g. , CD79B/PIM1) and dynamic molecular response via ctDNA (early/major molecular response), and appraise interim PET as prognostic but not treatment-directive outside trials.

In relapsed/refractory disease, second-line age-adjusted IPI and pre-transplant PET inform autologous transplantation candidacy, while randomized trials establish CD19 CAR-T as superior to salvage chemoimmunotherapy in early relapse or primary refractory settings; bispecific antibodies and antibody-drug conjugates expand options post-CAR-T or for transplant-ineligible patients. On the other side, CNS risk assessment is best approached with CNS-IPI refined by site and genotype; prophylaxis remains individualized given mixed efficacy signals.

Overall, risk-adapted, biologically driven care should report NCCN-IPI (alongside IPI) in all patients and incorporate imaging burden, genomics, and ctDNA where feasible.

论文信息

作者
Duminuco A、Scarso S、Del Fabro V、Caruso LA、Stanzione G、Di Raimondo F、Palumbo GA、Vetro C
单位
Hematology with BMT Unit, A.O.U. "G. Rodolico-San Marco", Via Santa Sofia, Catania, 78-95123, Italy. andrea.duminuco@unict.it.Italy
文献类型
综述
期刊
Annals of hematology2025 Oct
原文标识
PubMed 41114812 · DOI 10.1007/s00277-025-06686-3